Singapore Fines 9 Leading Financial Institutions S$27.45 Million for AML Failures

singapore aml failures fines monetary authrority 9 banks

This image is AI-generated.

Nine major financial institutions have been slapped with a staggering S$27.45 million in fines after Singapore’s biggest money laundering scandal exploded into the spotlight. The Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) dropped the hammer on 4 July 2025, concluding a sweeping two-year investigation that exposed deep-rooted failures in anti-money laundering (AML) controls and forced the city-state’s financial elite into damage control. The penalties, tied to the fallout of the sensational August 2023 case, underscore MAS’s zero-tolerance stance and its determination to restore confidence in the system.

The enforcement sweep has not only resulted in substantial financial penalties but also in prohibition orders and reprimands for key individuals in managerial and compliance roles. The scale and transparency of MAS’s actions serve as a warning and a guidepost for financial institutions operating in Singapore and beyond.

The Initial 2023 Scandal

In mid‑August 2023, Singapore police executed a sweeping operation targeting what would become the city‑state’s largest-ever money‑laundering affair. On 15 August 2023, authorities arrested 10 foreign nationals, later revealed to be associated with the so-called “Fujian gang,” in connection with a sophisticated online gambling and scam syndicate. Initial asset seizures totaled over S$1 billion, but by late 2023 the scope had ballooned to approximately S$3 billion—encompassing luxury cars, Bearbricks, real estate, gold bars, jewelry, and large cash holdings.

Over the next several months, all 10 arrested individuals—mostly Chinese nationals holding multiple passports—pled guilty to money-laundering and related charges in early to mid‑2024. Sentences ranged from 13 to 17 months in jail, followed by deportation and bans on returning to Singapore. Additional related convictions included charges against two former bankers in August 2023 for forging loan and tax documents.

The S$27.45 Million Penalty: Financial Institutions Held Accountable

The MAS conducted thorough supervisory examinations of financial institutions linked to persons of interest involved in the August 2023 money laundering case. These examinations, running from early 2023 through early 2025, revealed systemic gaps in customer due diligence, transaction monitoring, and risk assessment processes. Although most institutions had formal AML/CFT policies, failures typically occurred during the implementation phase, often due to inconsistent procedures or inadequate controls.

To address these lapses, MAS imposed a total of S$27.45 million in composition penalties. The penalty amount for each institution was calibrated based on several factors, including their exposure to the case, the volume and severity of control failures, and the effectiveness of their AML/CFT frameworks.

The following table summarizes the penalties imposed:

Financial Institution	Penalty (S$ million)
Credit Suisse Singapore Branch (CSSB)	5.8
United Overseas Bank Limited (UOB)	5.6
UBS AG, Singapore Branch (UBSS)	3.0
Citibank N.A. Singapore (CNAS) and Citibank Singapore Limited (CSL), collectively “Citi”	2.6
Bank Julius Baer & Co. Ltd., Singapore Branch (BJBS)	2.4
LGT Bank (Singapore) Ltd. (LGTS)	1.0
UOB Kay Hian Private Limited (UOBKH)	2.85
Blue Ocean Invest Pte. Ltd. (BOIPL)	2.4
Trident Trust Company (Singapore) Pte. Limited (TTCSPL)	1.8

This set of penalties marks the end of MAS’s current enforcement wave connected to this particular money laundering case, though ongoing monitoring and remediation are expected to continue for some institutions.

Key Failures in AML/CFT Controls Exposed

The regulatory findings underline the importance of not only establishing but also properly executing effective AML/CFT frameworks. Across the institutions penalized, MAS identified recurring weaknesses in several core compliance domains:

Customer Risk Assessment: Five institutions (BJBS, BOIPL, Citi, CSSB, and UOBKH) did not apply sufficiently robust methodologies to assess and rate money laundering risks. This resulted in some customers being misclassified, which, in turn, meant that appropriate risk mitigation measures were not always applied to higher-risk clients.
Source of Wealth (SOW) Corroboration: All nine institutions failed to properly corroborate significant aspects of customers’ source of wealth, particularly in high-risk scenarios. Documentation inconsistencies and red flags were often missed or insufficiently escalated.
Transaction Monitoring: Eight institutions (BJBS, Citi, CSSB, LGTS, UOB, UOBKH, TTCSPL, and UBSS) fell short in reviewing and acting on suspicious transaction alerts. There were multiple instances of unusually large or inconsistent transactions that were not adequately investigated.
Post-Suspicious Transaction Report (STR) Follow-up: UOB and UOBKH failed to implement timely and sufficient risk mitigation measures after filing suspicious transaction reports, exposing gaps in ongoing risk management for customers already flagged for potential money laundering.

For Credit Suisse Singapore Branch, additional breaches dating back to November 2017 were considered, specifically concerning accounts maintained for certain US customers. These historical failures were factored into the S$5.8 million penalty.

Enforcement Against Individuals: Senior Managers and Compliance Officers in the Spotlight

MAS’s response did not stop at institutional penalties. Recognizing the critical role of leadership and frontline managers, the authority also sanctioned individuals who failed in their compliance duties. Prohibition orders, lasting from three to six years, were issued to four former or current executives at Blue Ocean Invest Pte. Ltd.:

Tsao Chung-Yi, Chief Executive Officer and Executive Director (six-year PO)
Wong Xuan Ling, Chief Operating Officer (five-year PO)
Hsia Lun Wei @Henry Hsia, Executive Director and Relationship Manager (three-year PO)
Deng Xixi, former Relationship Manager (three-year PO)

The breaches included failures to develop, update, and audit effective AML/CFT policies, insufficient customer due diligence, and neglecting to escalate or investigate red flags associated with high-risk clients.

Additionally, MAS issued public reprimands to senior management at Trident Trust Company (Singapore) Pte. Limited (TTCSPL) for deficiencies in customer due diligence, particularly regarding source of wealth verification. Former team leaders at United Overseas Bank were also reprimanded for lapses in due diligence and risk escalation processes.

A further nine relationship managers and supervisors faced private reprimands for less severe, though still material, lapses in compliance standards.

Legal and Regulatory Framework: MAS AML/CFT Requirements

The authority’s enforcement is grounded in Singapore’s stringent AML/CFT regulatory regime, which is articulated through various MAS Notices. Each of the nine penalized entities is subject to the following relevant MAS notices and regulatory acts:

MAS Notice 626 (Banks)
MAS Notice 1014 (Merchant Banks)
MAS Notice SFA04-N02 (Capital Markets Intermediaries)
MAS Notice TCA-N03 (Licensed Trust Companies)

Each breach of these notices constitutes an offence under section 27B(2) of the Monetary Authority of Singapore Act (MAS Act 1970) and/or section 16(4) of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2022 (FSMA). The compounded fines imposed are authorized under section 176(1A) of the MAS Act and section 177(1) of the FSMA, with statutory penalties reaching up to S$1,000,000 per offence.

Best Practices and Ongoing Compliance Expectations

MAS has issued additional supervisory guidance for financial institutions, emphasizing the need for enhanced controls in customer due diligence, transaction monitoring, and escalation of suspicious activity. The regulator expects institutions to benchmark their internal frameworks against both MAS guidance and industry best practices, particularly in areas like source of wealth verification for high-risk clients.

The recent enforcement wave serves as a reminder to relationship managers and supervisors: vigilance and robust first-line compliance are essential to the integrity of Singapore’s financial system. The MAS has made it clear that repeated or significant failures will be met with strong regulatory action, both at the corporate and individual level.

Conclusion: Long-Term Impact of MAS Enforcement on Financial Crime Prevention

Singapore’s firm stance on AML/CFT compliance has again set a high bar for financial centers across the region. By holding both organizations and individuals accountable, MAS is signaling that strong governance, effective implementation, and a culture of risk awareness are non-negotiable for maintaining trust in the financial system. Financial institutions are now expected to go beyond compliance checklists, embedding risk-sensitive procedures and accountability into every level of their operations.

The aftermath of these actions is likely to result in tighter internal controls, more frequent audits, and a deeper commitment to best practices industry-wide. As Singapore’s regulatory landscape continues to evolve, the lessons from this case will influence compliance culture and AML/CFT frameworks throughout Asia and beyond.

Source: MAS

Some of FinCrime Central’s articles may have been enriched or edited with the help of AI tools. It may contain unintentional errors.

Want to promote your brand with us or need some help selecting the right solution or the right advisory firm? Email us at info@fincrimecentral.com; we probably have the right contact for you.